The program, run by the WGA West Diversity Department, identifies writers with TV staffing experience and makes samples of their work available to showrunners, producers, network and studio executives, and agents and managers, to provide increased access. Qualified guild members were invited to submit their work in one of five diversity categories: minority writers; writers with disabilities; women writers; writers age 55 and over; and gay and lesbian writers. The scripts were read and scored on a blind submission basis by WGAW members serving as judges, including showrunners and producers.

Some of the TV producers who served as judges were on hand during a news conference today announcing the winners as well as the unveiling of the guild’s annual TV staff diversity report, including Leo Chu and Eric S. Garcia (Supah Ninjas) and Glen Mazzara, former executive producer/showrunner of The Walking Dead. Mazzara, who has hired writers from the program, said it can help producers “get over the inertia” of continuing to hire from the same pool. Even though TV writing staffs tend to be small,” you can’t offer 10 jobs, but you can make a difference as a showrunner.”

20 Comments

MollyMac • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

A pathetic attempt to Balkanize and politicize a union, and to send the absurdly false message that these selected writers would otherwise have faced employment discrimination had the WGA not created arbitrary and laughably PC categories to ensconce them in. Just pathetic….and at the same time entirely characteristic of this guild’s current leadership. Writing is writing, it’s on the page or it isn’t. If it is, the writer tends to have a nice career. If it isn’t, now he cries discrimination and runs crying to the credulous souls at the WGA. Pathetic.

MollyMac • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

And by the way, I’m a WGA member in one of these new protected classes….I’d just prefer to get hired on merit. Old fashioned gal I guess.

Jess • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

I think the point is merit AND diversity.

MollyMac • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

By diversity, do you mean fat as well as thin? Articulate as well as stutterers? I mean, just how exactly do we fashion these protected classes? Maybe we should make Republicans a protected class, if we’re really concerned about diversity, because surely diversity of THOUGHT is just as important as, say, diversity of sexual proclivity, no? And as a veteran of many writers rooms, I have had the pleasure of working with a whole bunch of self-identified LGBT colleagues but not a single self-identified voter for Mitt Romney or John McCain or George W. Bush. So what does that mean–that such people are in the room but afraid to “come out,” or that they’re not in the room at all? And which should concern us most, from a diversity perspective?

My point is, this obsession with so-called “diversity” is instead a transparent attempt to create PC categories, wholly without logic or any regard for real diversity, and to use those categories as a cudgel to make hiring decisions based on considerations other than merit. It is laughable, it is outrageous, and it runs counter to every core American principle.

Jess • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

So a program’s diversity is only “real” based on your personal diversity standards?
Maybe spend less time souring your grapes and more time starting a diversity program for Republicans.

Help Me I'm Poor • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Protected class…? Female writer maybe? You’re definitely not a minority. This was phrased like a true elitist, ivy league, bubble-bred, trust-fund baby. Core American principles? Like slavery? Please sit down and shut up.

Peach • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

@mollymac : So you attribute the staggering discrepancy (detailed in the report above) to lack of merit? Women writers simply aren’t as talented? Please.

No one’s handing out jobs at random to anyone who shows their breasts or gay-card. These writers may have won the privilege of an awkward yearbook photo on Deadline, but their “merits” will now be judged alongside everyone else for possible staffing. No harm, no foul.

Poor MollyMac • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

@mollymac. Merit? I needed that laugh. If it was that simple diversity programs wouldn’t exist. There are several reports/articles even 2013 WGA TV diversity report shows minorities which includes women have made little progress in being hired for writing gigs. Odd you don’t recognize that fact.

Fred • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Bravo to you MollyMac. It is not PC to say but we know these programs hurt minority writers reputations. In every meeting I have to overcome this attitude that I am only there because of some b.s., guilt-inspired preference.

The problem is the few bigoted writers and executives in town get all the attention. We know who they are. Just avoid them or better yet send their asses into unemployment.

The Guild is full of it and they know it. We could address this problem but no one in leadership want to give ou their right to have a frat boy writers room.

well • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

My problem is less with these contests but with the studio’s diversity hire program at the staff level. How can anyone not “diverse” compete with free? All writers struggle to get hired for their first job. Why should someone who has worked just as hard as a diversity writer get passed up due to a show’s budget? I understand it’s important for there to be an incentive to hire more diverse writers, but I’ve seen time and time again showrunners just meet with diverse writers because they can’t afford a non-diverse writer, or, simply be forced to hire a diverse writer by the studio. As has already been stated, it has to be on the page. (And no, I’m not a bitter wannabe non-diverse writer. I’ve worked my way up the ranks and learned how hard it can be.)

JaneDoe • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

@well, why should anyone HAVE to be told that a diverse room makes for a better, more well-rounded show? Why are we so stifled in this country as to not include diverse hires on staff without being TOLD to? People hire who they’re comfortable working with. Why is it that in this town (broader scale: in this country) the frat boys who run the game only feel comfortable hiring people who look like themselves? That was rhetorical. It’s because this country was founded with precedents and ideals that races should be separated. It’s because we’ve been undoing what was done hundreds of years ago at a snail’s pace. It’s because at the same time people are marching on Washington for equal rights, we’re having this discussion on a comment board about why these programs are in place. It’s no different. Sad. But, definitely no different.

well • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

I think you’re absolutely correct in your comment, however, if you read my comment, I was speaking about something very specific… the free hires on a television writing staff. The showrunners I’ve known, none of who are frat boys, are more than willing to read and consider a person they don’t know, diverse or not, if they have talent. Especially at a staff writer level. My issue is with taking non diverse writers out of the equation by giving a financial incentive to shows who have budgets to consider, not the larger issue of making equal rights a priority in our society.

ITM • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Go Lena!

Close deadline, open fdx • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

I hate it when out of work writers argue.

Showrunner • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Haters be hating. Hollywood is a tough town… period. There are no magic formulas to success… Their work granted them the spoils of getting a coveted spot atop this list. There are not that many writing jobs for TV available. Talent does rise and writers (emerging and aspiring) have to use every resource available to them in order to break in and re-break in over and over in order to stay viable and working… most Diversity (NHMC, CAPE), WGA (WAP) or Studio (Disney ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.) programs are a long shot to get in. This is an opportunity for these writers to make a name for themselves and thrive. More new and diverse voices are needed in writers rooms. It lends itself to more diversity on TV … Congrats to the WAP Writers!

HillmanGrad • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

you sound like a wise showrunner to me.

Francis • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

But the point is: The WGA should not be advancing the careers of some of its members, and not others, simply because the chosen ones fall into some politically correct category of the moment.

Whitney • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Lena is da bomb.

ThunkDubious • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

It’s funny that the “winners” photo looks like every other ham-fisted attempt at diversity by way of Benneton ad – i.e., one black female, one asian male/female, one “hispanic”, one old and a bunch of basically white people. At the very least shouldn’t this one tiny, token (sic) gesture, just this one time be a room full of people that would otherwise get immediately stopped by security if they were found wandering on the lot? And how does giving a bunch of people, regardless of ethnicity, who have already secured paying writing gigs access, to the exclusion of new and/or unproven talent, benefit anyone other than those lucky chosen few? I mean good for them but how does this solve the problem?

Jason Nieves • on Mar 26, 2013 11:35 am

Facts not opinions:

Among the WGAW findings regarding the 2011-12 television season:

– 83.7 percent of the television writers were white; 6.5 percent were African American; 4 percent were Latino; 3.9 percent were Asian American; and 0.3 percent were Native American

– U.S. Latinos were underrepresented by a factor of 4 to 1

– 10 percent of TV shows had no female writers and nearly a third had no minority writers

– Of the 454 executive producers working on the 190 shows examined, 344 were white males (75.8 percent). Women were underrepresented by a factor of more than 2 to 1 among the writers who run television shows. People of color were underrepresented by a factor of nearly 5 to 1